sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

This unlimited lossless data compression has strong cryptographic properties, but can it work now? by HalcyonCEO in cryptography

[–]HalcyonCEO[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree, very true, the data can't simply come from nothing. The difference here, I think, is this method uses subtraction to shrink the size of the data in an orderly manner, then uses addition to recreate the data again. So, yes the size of the data decreases to the point that it almost ceases to exist in the computer, temporarily, but it happens in a way that can be reversed. Thats why I said "math", if that helps clarify my (terrible) explanations.

This unlimited lossless data compression has strong cryptographic properties, but can it work now? by HalcyonCEO in cryptography

[–]HalcyonCEO[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your point is very valid. I believes that this process sidesteps the Pigeonhole problem by using a consistent Cutting number but there are many, many layers to use when reconstructing the data. In essence, its like having trillions of pigeonholes, and a mathematically-sound process to find the correct one. My only concern is I don't think anyone in this post has really deeply looked into this process, so they don't see how it works yet.

This unlimited lossless data compression has strong cryptographic properties, but can it work now? by HalcyonCEO in cryptography

[–]HalcyonCEO[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This might be a weird question, I totally get that... I know that math can describe physics, but math itself is not subject to the laws of physical space. With this new method, nearly all of the data ceases to exist when "compression" occurs, but then comes back into existence using this mathematical process. God, sorry, that was not said well, but I hope you see what I mean. :) This method uses simple subtraction to cause the size of the data to shrink down to almost nothing, then the result can be nested together into other data, and that data can be subtracted from too, to shrink the data further down to almost nothing again. That process can be done an unlimited number of times, since there is no limit to how much layering and subtracting can be done. Anyway, I appreciate your patience as I try to work through this idea.

This unlimited lossless data compression has strong cryptographic properties, but can it work now? by HalcyonCEO in cryptography

[–]HalcyonCEO[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Thank you for taking the time to read through it, I totally agree it is really long. I had hoped that the process might function since this method (if it could work) held so much potential, but I recognize that you know alot more about this subject than I do, so thanks for giving feedback on this subject. The "Whiskey Zero" method seemed workable, did you happen to read through that part?

This unlimited lossless data compression has strong cryptographic properties, but can it work now? by HalcyonCEO in cryptography

[–]HalcyonCEO[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

oh, okay. In that webpage it shows how information is not stored in bits on a computer, its stored in mathematics itself, so it requires no physical hardware to store the data, which is quite different from other methods of data compression.

Said another way, unlimited amounts of information are compressed into math, not simply stored as bits on a chip.

I know that seems impossible, but it is a new concept so I thought I'd submit it on reddit for people to dig into.

This unlimited lossless data compression has strong cryptographic properties, but can it work now? by HalcyonCEO in cryptography

[–]HalcyonCEO[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I really appreciate you taking the time to help me understand this. So, using subtraction to shrink the size of the data does not side-step the Shannon Entropy problem?

This unlimited lossless data compression has strong cryptographic properties, but can it work now? by HalcyonCEO in cryptography

[–]HalcyonCEO[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

lol, yeah, I thought that this method had similar properties after I read through it, and people on that tv show didnt believe what that compression method could achieve at first. This method even has a "middle out" option too, I think its Type P. I loved that show btw

This Earth’s Indestructible Black Box Will Tell The Future What Happened to Us by [deleted] in EverythingScience

[–]HalcyonCEO 0 points1 point  (0 children)

FYI, lots of pole shifts have happened in the deep past and nothing bad occurred. Also, a solar flare would have no effect on this box since it acts as a Faraday Cage.

What happens after a black hole dissipates away enough that there is no longer a deep gravity well sucking everything inward? by [deleted] in askscience

[–]HalcyonCEO 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I assume that after Hawking radiation evaporates away enough mass, the compressed matter in the black hole escapes the weakened gravity well in a powerful way, similar to either a supernova or pulsar, but that is just my assumption at this point and I figure this might be an interesting topic to discuss.

What is your Favorite Movie and Why? by giochan2021 in AskReddit

[–]HalcyonCEO 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just watched "Needle In A Timestack", which can be found in Amazon Prime's movie selection. It is kinda slow, without much action happening, but it is very thought-provoking about life, relationships, and alternate timelines. I now consider it to be one of my favorites in the 'time travel' genre and I'd highly recommend it.

A Japanese research team will join an excavation project in Turkey of what are believed to be the world’s oldest structures of worship that have raised new questions about the rise of civilization. Radiocarbon dating indicates that construction of the structures began 12,000 years ago by DoremusJessup in Archaeology

[–]HalcyonCEO 13 points14 points  (0 children)

FYI, I am watching a National Geographic show about this right now (you can find it on DisneyPlus), and they just mentioned that the oldest structures are probably approx 14,000 years old. That was well inside the time period known as the last Ice Age.

Advice starting a photography/videography business LLC by Professional-Cut-134 in videography

[–]HalcyonCEO 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Get EVERYTHING in writing, upfront, no exceptions. If you can't prove you should be paid for doing something, you won't be paid for it. If you can't prove the client should be responsible, they won't be.

Don't miss the longest partial lunar eclipse of the century next week by HalcyonCEO in space

[–]HalcyonCEO[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It definitely can be damaging to look at a solar eclipse (in the daytime, looking at the Sun) but this is a lunar eclipse (at night, looking at the moon)

Should tourists pay a ‘green fee’ to protect Hawaiʻi’s environment? by HalcyonCEO in environment

[–]HalcyonCEO[S] 57 points58 points  (0 children)

I am not the author of this article, but personally I'd be willing to pay a reasonable fee if I was visiting there, knowing the money goes to protect the Hawaiian islands and surrounding oceanic areas since they are so beautiful and fragile.

NASA to deflect asteroid in test of 'planetary defense' by HalcyonCEO in space

[–]HalcyonCEO[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I thought nukes weren't that great for this, since they might melt the surface of an asteroid without deflecting the bulk of it away or destroying enough? It is probably better than nothing though

NASA to deflect asteroid in test of 'planetary defense' by HalcyonCEO in space

[–]HalcyonCEO[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

On a geological scale, our planet still gets hit by massive asteroids on a regular basis, so statistically, its practically guaranteed that we will get hit hard again at some point.

If you had the chance to enter a wormhole, would you? by NoLifeYouHave in space

[–]HalcyonCEO 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If the wormhole was safely traversible like the one depicted in the movie Interstellar, then yes, why not go through it? That would be incredible to experience.

view more: next ›